[ghc-steering-committee] Bang patterns: 343

[Alejandro Serrano Mena]

I agree with the rejection. My main concern, as shared by others in the
thread, is why this specific extension and not others.

I am really looking forward to the addition of synonyms for a bunch of
extensions. Personally, I would love to see a way to enable every
"additive" extension (I am thinking of MultiParamTypeClasses +
FlexibleThings + ViewAndBangPatterns + ...). I would be happy to help with
setting up the process.

Regards,
Alejandro

El mar., 28 jul. 2020 a las 10:03, Simon Peyton Jones via
ghc-steering-committee (<ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org>) escribió:

> Friends
>
> Despite asking, I’m not seeing any support for proposal 343 “Enable bang
> patterns by default
> <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/343>”, except from
> the author. He makes a good case, but I think it’s a case that you could
> make for quite a few extensions.
>
> I propose that we reject the proposal as written.  Any objections?
>
> That leaves the wider question, best summarised by Joachim’s post
> <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/343#issuecomment-664631343>:
> we could occasionally add a new synonym for a bunch of extensions.   I
> suppose we’d have to (a) debate and decide that process and (b) execute on
> the process.   Perhaps that’d be useful but it’s all work.  Let’s first see
> if there is real support for doing it.   If so, probably the best thing
> would be for someone who wants it to happen to write a proposal (as Joachim
> has started) describing the process.
>
> Simon
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20200728/726d86a1/attachment.html>